In re the Paternity of Makayla Lauren Pickett, Gregg Roberts v. Shonda Pickett
44 N.E.3d 756
Ind. Ct. App.2015Background
- Child (born 1995) was found to be Father’s child; Mother had custody and Father had visitation. Father was ordered to pay child support and share uninsured medical expenses and maintain life insurance.
- Relationship between Father and Child became strained; they had limited contact after Child’s 2013 high‑school graduation. Child began attending Butler University in fall 2013 and was emancipated at 19 on Feb 21, 2014.
- Mother filed a motion for contempt (for unpaid child support/medical expenses) and for college/educational support on Feb 18, 2014. A contempt hearing followed.
- Trial court found Father in contempt, ordered him to pay past child support and medical arrears, sanctioned him $2,000 toward Mother’s attorney fees, and ordered Child, Mother, and Father each to pay one‑third of college costs — but allocated the student’s one‑third to scholarships/grants and split the remaining balance 50/50 between parents.
- Trial court imputed potential income to Father (found him voluntarily underemployed) and based his college contribution on Butler (a private university) costs, and ordered him to contribute to fall 2013 college expenses (prior to Mother’s Feb 18 motion).
- On appeal the court affirmed contempt, the 50/50 split of the post‑aid balance, and the attorney‑fee sanction; but reversed the portions requiring Father to pay for (1) expenses incurred before Mother’s motion and (2) contributions measured by private (Butler) costs rather than a public university; remanded for recalculation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of findings for appellate review | Findings sufficient; evidence in record supports order | Findings inadequate; no postsecondary worksheets; remand needed | Findings were adequate for review; no remand required |
| Whether Child repudiated Father (excusing contribution) | N/A – Mother sought college support | Father: Child repudiated him so he should not be required to pay | Father waived the argument for failing to raise it below; in any event evidence permitted requiring Father to contribute |
| Apportionment of remaining college balance (50/50 split between parents) | 50/50 split was appropriate given imputing income to Father | Should be proportional to parents’ incomes (approx. 65/35) | Affirmed: trial court did not clearly err in ordering Father to pay half after imputing potential income to him |
| Basis for college cost calculation (private v. public) | Use actual school attended (Butler) | Should be limited to in‑state public college costs | Reversed: trial court abused discretion by using private school cost; remanded to base obligation on public university costs unless justified otherwise |
| Retroactivity — ordering Father to pay college expenses incurred before motion | Mother sought educational support covering Child’s college; Father should share costs from start of attendance | Trial court cannot require payment for expenses incurred before motion filing date | Reversed in part: trial court erred in requiring Father to pay for fall 2013 expenses incurred before Mother’s Feb 18, 2014 motion |
| Attorney’s fees as contempt sanction ($2,000) | Fees were reasonable and sanction proper for contempt | Fee award excessive because Father admitted arrearage and did not contest amounts | Affirmed: trial court acted within inherent contempt authority; $2,000 sanction not unreasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Eisenhut v. Eisenhut, 994 N.E.2d 274 (Ind. Ct. App.) (standard for reviewing findings and general judgment principles)
- Hirsch v. Oliver, 970 N.E.2d 651 (Ind.) (abuse of discretion standard for postsecondary educational expense orders)
- Quinn v. Threlkel, 858 N.E.2d 665 (Ind. Ct. App.) (importance of detailed findings and postsecondary worksheets)
- McKay v. McKay, 644 N.E.2d 164 (Ind. Ct. App.) (repudiation doctrine and effect on parental obligation for college)
- Carr v. Carr, 600 N.E.2d 943 (Ind.) (educational expenses should reflect parental income proportions)
- Bojrab v. Bojrab, 810 N.E.2d 1008 (Ind.) (trial court discretion to impute potential income and review limited to abuse of discretion)
- Million v. Swager, 807 N.E.2d 140 (Ind. Ct. App.) (considerations when ordering contribution for expensive/private college attendance)